Robots Take Human Factor Out of Mining

More and more robots are making a variety of tasks and operations -- such as factory work, picking crops, and even noodle making -- more efficient, and mining is no exception.

Engineers have developed robots to take the human factor out of mining work and provide automation in the process, which not only makes it more efficient, but also less dangerous for the people involved. They also are developing robots that can greatly assist in efforts to rescue trapped miners, making this task also safer for those performing the rescue efforts.

Robotic innovations like Rail-Veyor's conveyor system for hauling materials in and out of mines are taking some of the human factor out of mining, making it more efficient and safe for workers. (Source: Rail-Veyor Technologies)

The Copper Cliff Mine 114 Orebody in Sudbury, Ontario, is using a robotic conveyor system to haul materials in and out of mines developed by Rail-Veyor Technologies Global. The Brazilian company that owns the mine, Vale, has been testing and installing the system for about two years and it’s now fully operational. “This investment allows us to test new and innovative mining technologies that could dramatically improve mining processes across our operations,” said Alex Henderson, a Vale general manager, in a press release.

The system is compact, consisting of a dump truck-like vessel and a conveyor belt with a light rail track that is one third of the weight of an average rail -- 40 pounds versus the typical 120-pound rail, according to the company. This compact design also allows the conveyor system to fit in small places in a mine, such as under bridges and tunnels, where it can clear obstacles. This reduces the cost of underground development of the mine, according to Rail-Veyor.

Rail-Veyor’s system is also nimble, traveling at grades up to 20 percent, with a turning radius of 30m. This also makes it more agile to travel in tight spaces, allowing it to go deep into mines where it may be dangerous for humans. GPS and sensor technologies can run the system automatically, though operators above the ground also can monitor it remotely, according to Rail-Veyor.

While Rail-Veyor’s system can make typical mine operations more efficient, another company -- Penguin Automated Systems Inc. (ASI) -- has built a robot called the Recon Robot System that can be used in rescue operations in case of a mine collapse or other disaster-type situation. The robots, which mine administrators also can use to evaluate and determine the stability of a mine, can be deployed for rescue operations in case part of the mine caves in and possibly traps miners.

Rescuers can deploy two robots weighing 1,500 pounds each, one to navigate and perform rescue tasks -- such as removing debris out of the path to the surface -- and another as a communications hub to establish contact with operators above ground.

The robot performing work has a navigation system and a boom with an HD camera attached to collect images from the mine, which the robot in charge of communications can receive signals from operators above ground and relay them to the worker robot, according to Penguin ASI.

All told, the robots each have four cameras and batteries that provide 12 hours of life, or six if the robots work at a 45-degree angle, according to Penguin. The company has designed the wheels of the robots -- of which there are eight arranged in pairs -- to allow them to move over debris and large pieces of rock in a mine, or to be fitted with track if appropriate.

Penguin’s robots are currently being deployed in a mine in Chile and also have been used to help in recovery efforts when a mall roof collapsed in Elliot Lake, Ontario, earlier this year.

TJ, thanks for a clear summary of the components of a robotic system. If this system, or parts of it, are self-driving for example, as Elizabeth's comment states, or partially autonomous in another way, then the label probably applies.(Total robot autonomy does not yet exist, except in fiction).

3drob, I agree. There's a fine line between automation and robotics. Some of the roboticists purest argue that a robot must be autonomous with no human interaction. Also, automation falls in the domain of autonomous and that the system describe would be considered a robot. These conversations are quite intriguing and I'll keep reading these articles about the subject to see the tech communities' conclusion.

My definition of "robot" includes mobility in non-preset ways (i.e. the generic ability to handle new situations without being "reconstructed"). It doesn't imply un-attended operation (that would make it an automaton), only the ability to remotely control it.

Conveyer belts are set up with specific source/destination points, so although it moves things intelligently, it moves those things only to the pre-set locations. Handling new situations (e.g. a new tunnel) requires "reconstruction" to add new tracks. Unattended yes, but not a robot.

I never thought of it 'till now, but standard (available for decades) mining equipment (hydrolic diggers) classify as robots more correctly than this article's subject. They are machines/vehicles that translate user direction at a remotable control panel to mechanical operation at the digging point.

Perhaps the article on the rail-veyor product left out pertinant info? The rescue robots are (I think) more clearly "robots".

It is my understanding that the conveyor system goes beyond mere automation and acts in the same way as other "robotic" cars and self-driving systems, so ventures slightly beyond normal conveyor systems into the world of robotics. But perhaps it's a gray area, and your points about it being more automation what is considered robotics are well taken.

Ann, I agree. As I was reading the article and didn't get the since of robots performing mining operations but Industrial Automation being at work. Industrial Equipment Manufacturers need to be careful in using the word "robot" in their advertisment. It's quite easy to mislead the potential customer into thinking their buying a certain piece of machinery when they're not.

From working to saving lives, seems like these robots are doing some good. The mining industry is possibly the worst for human workers. Being trapped in a collapsed mine is least painful danger they face. So any little help will save lives.

I like how bots are now the ones on the dangerous end of jobs. Take the military bomb defusing bots, they have saved countless lives. Or the legion of bots deployed at the Fukushima disaster site. In this case, it is 2012, humans should not be at risk deep under the earth. (I would say, we shouldn't be there at all. But even now, coal mining employs a lot of people. Where would they go otherwise?)

Elizabeth, what I'm asking (about the rail-veyor system specifically) is, is it a "robot"? It sounds like a car moves along a rail, and some conveyor belts. That sounds more like industrial automation.

For example, a smart belt conveyor system detects products that arrive at random times and by accelerating / decelerating adjusts the a single product at a time so as to evenly space them, or deliver them to a flighted conveyor between the flights instead of on them.

Would you call such a system a "robot"? To me, that's industrial automation. The rail-veyor system would appear to be more like simple industrial automation rather than robotics.

Is a series of 4 pneumatic actuators and detection sensors programmed to push the products into 4 different totes based on bar code (or color, or size, or weight, etc.) as they come down a conveyor system a robot?

I would say that is simple industrial automation as well.

But take an mechanical arm, driven by a number of servo motors, provide a camera and program that arm to pick up each product and place it in the appropriate tote based on the camera input; that system I would call a robot.

A vehicle (air, land or sea) that can autonomously navigate and adjust its course based on its perception of the environment is also called a robot according to other articles here in Design News.

As we've discussed in other DN articles and lots of comment threads, such as here http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1386&doc_id=250357&piddl_msgpage=2#msgs the standard definition of a robot is an electromechanical (or mechatronic) device that works automatically. But many people assume, perhaps from science fiction movies and/or remote-controlled toys, that robots are machines that can function separately and independently of a large automation system such as are found in industrial automation Some even think a robot must be intelligent and/or autonomous. The lines are somewhat fuzzy, and as technology changes so are the definitions. That said, the conveyor system in the photo looks like a standard industrial automation conveyor system, so I guess I'm also wondering: where are the robots?

If a major catastrophe strikes your area, will you be prepared? Do you know how to modify the tech you've already got or MacGyver what you need to fit your own situation? A free, five-day Continuing Education Center course starting April 6 will show you how.

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.